I FT 

MEADE 


ADDRESS OF 

PRESIDENT TAFT 


AT THE BANQUET OF THE 
LOTOS CLUB, NEW YORK 
CITY, NOVEMBER 16, 1912 



WASHINGTON 







M ! % *?* 


r 


/ 









u ij -/Jr ' \ : x J l \*' ^ .v U 

jjt v4 /. .• - f 

6''■,**> jy *.”• ‘ ♦.*/ *,‘ r 'C5s’ i - ’V 

r% .\vt • viVi- / '*;t-Ar M 





i 




/ 


4 



«* 





31 

v. 









4 










\ ri , • \ 



ADDRESS OF 

PRESIDENT TAFT 


AT THE BANQUET OF THE 
LOTOS CLUB, NEW YORK 
CITY, NOVEMBER 16, 1912 



WASHINGTON 

1912 






to 


! 6 N 


c 


'b 
s«A 



I>, OF 0. 

DEC 9 191 ? 


o *> 

• * > 



ADDRESS OF PRESIDENT TAFT AT 
THE BANQUET OF THE LOTOS 
CLUB, NEW YORK CITY, NOVEM¬ 
BER 16, 1912. 

Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Lotos Club : 

The legend of the lotos eaters was that if they par¬ 
took of the fruit of the lotos tree they forgot what had 
happened in their country and were left in a state of 
philosophic calm in which they had no desire to return 
to it. 

I do not know what was in the mind of your distin¬ 
guished invitation committee when I was asked to at¬ 
tend this banquet. They came to me before the election. 
At first I hesitated to accept lest when the dinner came, 
by the election, I should be shorn of interest as a guest 
and be changed from an active and virile participant in 
the day’s doings of the Nation to merely , a dissolving 
view. I knew that generally on an occasion of this sort 
the motive of the diners was to have a guest whose 
society should bring them more closely into contact 
with the great present and future and not be merely a 
reminder of what has been. But, after further consid¬ 
eration, I saw in the name of your club the possibility 
that you were not merely cold, selfish seekers after 
pleasures of your own, and that perhaps you were 
organized to furnish consolation to those who mourn, 
oblivion to those who would forget, an opportunity for 
a swan song to those about to disappear. This thought 
prompted by the coming, as one of your committee, of 
the gentleman who knows everything in the world that 
has happened and is going to happen, and especially 
that which is going to happen, by reason of his control 
of the Associated Press, much diminished my confi- 

(3) 


4 


dence in the victory that was to come on election day. 
I concluded that it was just as well to cast an anchor 
to the windward and accept as much real condolence as 
I could gather in such a hospitable presence as this, 
and therefore, my friends, I accepted your invitation 
and am here. 

You have given me the toast of “ The President,” and 
I take this toast not merely as one of respect to the 
office and indicative of your love of country, and as 
typical of your loyalty, but I assume for the purposes 
of to-night that a discussion of the office which I have 
held and in which I have rejoiced and suffered will not 
be inappropriate. 

It is said that the office of President is the most pow¬ 
erful in the world, because under the Constitution its 
occupant really can exercise more discretion than an 
emperor or king exercises in any of the governments 
of modern Europe. I am not disposed to question this 
as a matter of reasoning from the actual power given 
the President in the constitutional division of govern¬ 
mental functions, but I am bound to say that the con¬ 
sciousness of such power is rarely if ever present in 
the mind of the ordinary individual acting as President, 
because what chiefly stares him in the face in carrying 
out any plan of his is the limitation upon the power and 
not its extent. Of course, there are happy individuals 
who are able entirely to ignore these limitations both 
in mind and practice, and as to them the result may be 
different. But to one whose training and profession 
is subordinate to law, the intoxication of power rapidly 
sobers off in the knowledge of its restrictions and under 
the prompt reminder of an ever-present and a not 
always considerate press, as well as-by the kindly sug¬ 
gestions that not infrequently come from that Hall of 
Congress in which impeachments are initiated and that 
smaller Chamber in which they are tried. 

In these days of progress, reform, uplift, and im¬ 
provement a man does not show himself abreast of the 


age unless he has some changes to suggest. It is the 
recommended change that marks his being up to date. 
It may be a change only for the sake of change, but it 
is responsive to a public demand, and therefore let’s 
propose it. It is contrary to my own love for the dear 
old Constitution to suggest any alteration in its terms, 
lest it be regarded as a reflection upon, or a criticism 
of, that which has been put to the sacred use for 125 
years of maintaining liberty regulated by law, and the 
guaranties of the rights of the minority and the indi¬ 
vidual under the rule of the majority. But yielding to 
the modern habit, and just to show that though I am 
a conservative I am not a reactionary or a trilobite, I 
venture the suggestion that it would aid the efficiency 
of the executive and center his energy and attention 
and that of his subordinates in the latter part of his 
administration upon what is a purely disinterested pub¬ 
lic service, if he were made ineligible after serving one 
term of six years either to a succeeding or a noncon- 
secutive term. I am a little specific in this matter be¬ 
cause it seems necessary to be so in order to be under¬ 
stood. I don’t care how unambitious or modest a 
President is, I don’t care how determined he is that 
he himself will not secure his renomination (and there 
are very few, indeed, who go to that extent), still his 
subordinates equally interested with him in his reelec¬ 
tion will, whenever they have the opportunity, exert 
their influence and divide their time between the public 
service and the effort to secure their chief’s renomina¬ 
tion and reelection. It is difficult to prevent the whole 
administration from losing a part of its effectiveness 
for the public good by this diversion to political effort 
for at least a year of the four of each administration. 
Were this made impossible by law, I can see no reason 
why the energy of the President and that of all his 
subordinates might not be directed rather to making 
a great record of efficiency in the first and only term 
than in seeking a second term for that purpose. 


6 


Four years is rather a short time in which to work out 
great governmental policies. Six years is better. 

Another suggestion I would make is that legislative 
steps be taken, for there is nothing in the Constitution to 
forbid it, bringing more closely together the operation 
of the executive and legislative branches. The studied 
effort in which to maintain these branches rigidly sepa¬ 
rate is, I think, a mistake. I would not add any more 
actual power to the executive in legislative matters, nor 
would I give the legislative any more actual power in 
executive matters. The veto on the one hand and the 
confirmation of appointments and the ratification of 
treaties on the other, I would not change. But it does 
seem to me that they need not be at arm’s length, as they 
now are under our present system. It has been pro¬ 
posed twice in our history, after the fullest consideration 
by some of the wisest statesmen we have ever had, to 
pass a law giving to each department head a seat in the 
Senate and in the House, and a right to enter into the 
discussion of the proposed legislation in either of the 
national legislative bodies. This would keep Congress 
much better informed as to the actual conditions in the 
executive departments. It would keep the department 
heads on the qui vive with reference to their knowledge 
of their own departments and their ability to answer 
appropriate questions in respect to them. It would 
necessitate the appointment to the Cabinet of men used 
to debate and to defend their positions, and it would 
offer an opportunity for the public to judge of the 
Executive and his government much more justly and 
much more quickly than under our present system. 
The ignorance that Congress at times has of what is 
actually going on in the executive departments and 
the fact that hours of debate and pages of the Con¬ 
gressional Record might be avoided by the answer to a 
single question by a competent Cabinet officer on the 
floor of either House is frequently brought sharply to 
the attention of competent observers. I think, too, it 


might, perhaps, promote the amenities between the two 
branches if this system were introduced. 

The rules of the two Houses, as I am advised, forbid 
the use of abusive language by one Member against 
another, and by the Member of one House against the 
other House or its Members. A somewhat close exami¬ 
nation of the rules, however, of both Houses does not 
show that there is any limitation upon the parliamen¬ 
tary character of the language which may be directed 
against the President. As to him, the Members pursue 
their own sweet will, and that sometimes leads them 
into language and epithetical description of the Chief 
Executive that could hardly be called complimentary. 
If members of the Cabinet were allowed the floor their 
very presence would suggest, in the possibility of reply, 
moderation in discussing the administration, which 
does not now at all times prevail. The strongest reason 
for advocating this change, however, is that the in¬ 
fluence the Executive shall have in shaping legisla¬ 
tion shall be more in harmony with the responsibility 
that the people hold him to in respect to it. He is the 
head of the party that elected him, and as such, if Con¬ 
gress is controlled by the same political party—as it 
generally is—he is looked to to shape the congressional 
policy and to secure the passage of the statutes which 
the party platform has promised. Now, with such a 
burden on him he ought to have a greater means of 
bringing about what he wishes in the character of the 
legislation to be considered by Congress, and greater 
powers of persuasion to secure the adoption of such 
legislation than those which the mere right to send mes¬ 
sages and the mere opportunity of personal consulta¬ 
tion with leading Members of the House and Senate 
give him. I doubt not that the presence of able Cabinet 
officers on the floor of each House would give greater 
harmony of plan for the conduct of public business in 
both Houses, and would secure much more valuable 
legislation in accordance with party plans than we have 


8 


now. On the other hand, the system would enable Con¬ 
gress to come closer to the Executive and pry more 
effectively into each act and compel a disclosure of the 
reasons justifying it immediately at the time of the act, 
and keep the public more quickly advised by the direct 
questions of hostile critics, which must be answered, 
of the progress of business under Executive auspices. 
Of course this is not the complete English system, be¬ 
cause it does not give to the Cabinet the power to lead 
and control legislative action as the British Govern¬ 
ment may in Parliament. But it combines so much of 
that which is valuable, and as it can be done by a mere 
act of Congress, I think it ought to be tried. 

One of the results of my observation in the Presidency 
is that the position is not a place to be enjoyed by a 
sensitive man. Lawrence Sterne said that “ the Lord 
tempers the wind to the shorn lamb.” The experience 
in the Presidency toughens the hide of the occupant so 
as to enable him to resist the stings of criticism directed 
against him from the time he takes office until he lays 
it down. In so far as these criticisms are just, of course 
they ought not to be avoided. In so far as they are 
based on facts, whether they are just or unjust, they 
must be taken at their value upon the consideration of 
the facts. But the query arises in respect to those criti¬ 
cisms and attacks that are made without the slightest 
reference to the facts, and merely for the purpose of 
invoking popular opposition and distrust, and with the 
hope that by constant repetition they can escape any 
possible refutation. I don’t know that this evil has 
been any greater in this administration than in a pre¬ 
vious administration. All I know is that it was my first 
experience and that it seemed to me as if I had been 
more greatly tried than most Presidents by such meth¬ 
ods. The result in some respects is unfortunate in 
that after one or two efforts to meet the unfounded 
accusations, despair in the matter leads to indifference 
and perhaps to an indifference toward both just and 


9 


unjust criticism. This condition helps the comfort of 
the patient, but I doubt if it makes him a better Presi¬ 
dent. Of course, the reassuring formula that history 
will right one and will give one his just meed of praise 
is consolatory, but it is not altogether satisfactory, 
because the thought suggests itself that the time for 
remedying he injustice may be postponed until one is 
gathered to his fathers and when he is not then par¬ 
ticularly interested in earthly history or mundane 
affairs. 

I think the period for successful muckraking is grad¬ 
ually drawing to a close. I hope so. The evil of the 
cruel injustice that has been done to many public men 
in this regard will certainly show itself in the future, 
and we must consider that the ebullition in muckraking 
literature is only one of the temporary excesses of the 
times which is curing itself by tiring those whose 
patronage formed the motive for its beginning and rise. 

The Presidency is a great office to hold. It is a great 
honor and it is surrounded with much that makes it 
full of pleasure and enjoyment for the occupant, in spite 
of its heavy responsibilities and the shining mark that 
it presents for misrepresentation and false attack. I 
consider that the President of the United States is well 
paid. The salary by no means measures the contribu¬ 
tion to his means of living which the generosity of 
Congress has afforded, and, unless it is the policy of 
Congress to enable him in his four years to save money 
enough to live in adequate dignity and comfort there¬ 
after, then the salary is all that it ought to be. Of 
course the great and really the only lasting satisfaction 
that one can have in the administration of the great 
office of President is the thought that one has done 
something permanently useful to his fellow country¬ 
men. The mere enjoyment of the tinsel of office is 
ephemeral, and unless one can fix one’s memory on 
real progress made through the exercise of presidential 
power there is little real pleasure in the contemplation 


10 


of the holding of that or any other office, however great 
its power or dignity or high its position in the minds of 
men. 

I beg you to believe that in spite of the very em¬ 
phatic verdict by which I leave the office, I cherish 
only the deepest gratitude to the American people for 
having given me the honor of having held the office, 
and I sincerely hope in looking back over what has been 
done that there is enough of progress made to warrant 
me in the belief that real good has been accomplished, 
even though I regret that it has not been greater. My 
chief regret is my failure to secure from the Senate 
the ratification of the general arbitration treaties with 
France and Great Britain. I am sure they would have 
been great steps toward general world peace. What 
has actually been done I hope has helped the cause of 
peace, but ratification would have been a concrete and 
substantial step. I do not despair of ultimate success. 
We must hope and work on. 

The sustained mental work in the presidential office 
is not, I think, so great as is generally supposed. The 
nervous strain is greater. As it should be, the President 
has a great many assistants to furnish him data and 
actually to prepare his letters and his official communi¬ 
cations. If he is careful, of course he corrects and 
changes these enough to put his own personality into 
them. His time is very much taken up with social func¬ 
tions, state and otherwise. This is inevitable with the 
affairs of state, and his actual time for real hard intel¬ 
lectual work is limited. That part of his time which is 
taken up with the smaller patronage of the office—that 
is, I mean the local patronage, the postmasters, and the 
collectors—is in my judgment wasted, and ought to be 
removed by putting all the local offices in the classified 
civil-service system, so that it shall be automatic in its 
operation and the President may not be bothered and 
the Congressmen and Senators may not be bothered 
with that which is supposed to aid politically, but which 


11 


in the end always operates as a burden to the person 
upon whom its use is thrust. 

I observe that the question of how receptions are to be 
accorded to those who have business at the White House 
is now under consideration, and I have been consider¬ 
ably amused at the suggestion that it would be possible 
to do the public business in the presence of everybody, 
so that all who are interested might draw near to the 
Executive Office and stand and see and hear the com¬ 
munications from those who enjoy appointed consulta¬ 
tions with the head of the Nation. This matter is al¬ 
ways the subject of consideration at the beginning of 
each administration, and it always settles down to an 
arrangement which satisfies few people but which al¬ 
lows those who have the most important business gen¬ 
erally to have the easiest and longest access to the Presi¬ 
dent. A President has just so much time to see people, 
and if the number of people is very great, as it always is 
at the beginning of an administration, the amount of 
time he can give to each is very limited. No matter 
what is done, it will be certain that somebody’s toes are 
stepped on, and when I am asked what is the proper 
way of arranging receptions of people under conditions 
which exist I am forced to tell the story of the gentle¬ 
man who lived on “ Sascatchequarle Creek.” He was 
asked how he spelled the name of the creek, and he 
said, “Some spells it one way and some spells it another, 
but in my judgment thare are no correct way of spell¬ 
ing it.” 

And now, my friends, I come to the final question 
which is of immediate moment to me, and in respect to 
which I observe some discussion and comment and sug¬ 
gestion in the press of the day, “What are we to do 
with our ex-Presidents?” I am not sure Dr. Osier’s 
method of dealing with elderly men would not properly 
usefully apply to the treatment of ex-Presidents. The 
proper and scientific administration of a dose of chloro¬ 
form or of the fruit of the lotos tree, and the reduction 


12 


of the flesh of the thus quietly departed to ashes in a 
funeral pyre to satisfy the wishes of his friends and the 
families, might make a fitting end to the life of one who 
had held the highest office, and at the same time would 
secure the country from the troublesome fear that the 
occupant could ever come back. His record would have 
been made by one term and his demise in the honorable 
ceremony that I have suggested would relieve the coun¬ 
try from the burden of thinking how he is to support 
himself and his family, would fix his place in history, 
and enable the public to pass on to new men and new 
measures. I commend this method for consideration. 

I observe that our friend Mr. Bryan proposes another 
method of disposing of our ex-Presidents. Mr. Bryan 
has not had exactly the experience of being a President. 
He has been a “ near President ” for three times, and 
possibly that qualifies him as an expert to speak of what 
we ought to do with our ex-Presidents. He has been 
very vigorous in this campaign in helping to make me 
an ex-President, and if I have followed with accuracy 
his public declarations and his private opinions, he is 
anxious to perform the office of making my successor 
an ex-President after one term. As a Warwick and as 
a maker of ex-Presidents I think we should give great 
and respectful consideration to his suggestion. Instead 
of ending the ex-Presidential life by chloroform or lotos 
eating he proposes that it should expire under the anes¬ 
thetic effect of the debates of the Senate. He proposes 
that ex-Presidents should be confined to the business 
of sitting in the Senate and listening to the discussions 
in that body. We may assume that he proposes that 
the ex-Presidents shall share the burden of the Presi¬ 
dent of the Senate as he listens to the soliloquies which 
the various members of that body pour into the Con¬ 
gressional Record, while the remainder of the Senators 
are engaged in more entertaining and less somnolent 
occupation. The ex-Presidents are to have seats in the 
Senate and join in the discussion, but not to vote. Why 


13 


Mr. Bryan should think it necessary to add to the dis¬ 
cussion in the Senate the lucubrations of ex-Presidents, 
I am at a loss to say. I can not conceive of any reform 
in the Senate which does not lead to a limit to their 
debate. For many reasons I object to Mr. Bryan’s dis¬ 
position of ex-Presidents. If I must go and disappear 
into oblivion, I prefer to go by the chloroform or lotos 
method. It’s pleasanter and it’s less drawn out. 

But, my friends, I have occupied your time too long 
in my cursory remarks, the subject of which at times 
'jnay have seemed too sober and grave for lotos eaters, 
but as the office of the Presidency is still in my keeping, 
and as the thought of parting with it is perhaps the 
most prominent one that figures in my mind, I have 
ventured to discuss it in accents both grave and gay, 
I wish to express deep gratitude to you for the honor 
which you have done me in making me your guest 
to-night, and I close with a sentiment and a toast to 
which I most sincerely and cordially ask your unani- 
mous acclaim— 

Health and success to the able, distinguished, and 
patriotic gentleman who is to be 

The next President of the United States! 


o 



























# 






IP?wMr <h.kw^^P iSKi^S} % -V£W {)•«’ V 1 j£& | *S ; ivt)*&vfe jj$jfcA *<4 

#*•. \W& , £#>frig# '•^ i 4‘ 2KW&' frwm, >r * J. ’• y *'£ is* $ 


yg* -• 4 *@. m »ME» ■ feRc, m #m' $SBBk if; m * ffi 

S*«ffiV /kVii,--r. , o.'.u>'.-7'i i'- .H-T "-V^'' vV. ;>/i ; • >}ii' •vtRSt 3 

pi? -v 

,> *; 

1 Ta®$% M" .• $&$£'$ v < mwl syM 

?%-» h. . aL-- •-cSfo’ iv.v ii>' Vi7- i; 4, ' ■ &V«V> >&*■•, ■>' ••&■'- **« 

•tf. s -V'/ i\>*,?.V’J '‘ii^V 'Vi- cw : ' 'r v -v' ''>. S».«-. •>.-/-• ••’ *v.-.r,*\7/ >.'5 

S^SfciviySta/*.;-; W& .' ?' ; V;IVt-ttV? ’^v Y ’/ «<: v 3fc. 


k‘A .V, ^ VJ »*• ...«a*’ 7 ,'*> i,»* 

V. A M?P*/ Tl 4*®# / ^ 

;* ‘l , ^ ’rvr-\ • Jf £&* ‘ #1 


l4^ ^Rv‘' v<5 il 

|G?y Vi •*.;■,ft' •V>'^Hj 


#\'221r 




V -v» 2g Y'v\ l' 


Jk ffimm 

x„ ... ■ t .& *> 


*&W ;W^ ? -?s 

)Hiitrio‘3[4-*A. ?&L\ *•• :> t 


1 

•* ^ v J\ f 


vk&r$ 


;- % V*4v\ ; -*" ••'■ XVS-t vj-V*-v$*t.£ 

b $i$£iw£& 


. ra ; 

-$#V£w & fe# r: 

•^y •:)• S'.; Wr&iL 2&.W't&itt?'$%%■ 

1 v'\ij*'-'|^?^-?5,H' *'^ 

>T ■■. ,'' ; ,r 4;/14 ^'^: '> 

. *wV’ J * -$fV' > .i‘*/*■ ; |, 4 , T Ji^jw '^ l t H ■• tly • ■'iX r^5_XjyVV 

•k«4V*? aV^r.J r .; • - > -• •«:.•* W. 

’K' ~ * 


'j' 


,im 

Vy 5.v,, 


fr ! . hv‘ ' v 

•i- 




$1* 


T if 


i\S>Jy: 

-■~’ '►’"»- t‘V* ’,•?] 




'A'«, 


TO 


mp 






> >4 


pfe’Wf : SK:' 

?. - /&•*-■• t ;>«'',-■ ‘*iv‘ • : >* 


I : %v. 


• / ■» ' » . ’ »> \ ; «• '* > , i • . ■ f a t ►•J 

>vV:. >^'if.'i:f. '■ j £J'•* , ‘n;4j 

- 


iVf- 




'i’fi 




-p,|C 


»J • K 


1 - iffa ■ i .- ^ iivO’t irJ.,: 4/i 

P jfiW ^ 

Msm ini 1 


iUL 


Jkk-dQ 


A I 


-yil 


-i r *.y,- 


V'.TWJ 


1 jc c' 




A/.’, -’i 




, ^ j 


..*rt 


l ,.i 


t'M^P 

• c» S 


V A- 


*”tr '% 
\ i.:w 


4>, 

•T- ' 






- H 


••!•». ft?* ■*! ' 'j,*l 
■* , ( ' 

iV, ;/ /?• ».. x JUt, 


i>. 


\j /.“wkif? 




'■> v-'ji-: 


*4 V '<L-,! / 




J't 








«* • 
v 

'V-» 




jyT v 


'E*i-*'* > 


jS i 


AV tr A 


: 


• - \ i- •: ] 


>/■■•'. 




/#• 


X • 


,.X li 
i"'t 4 v 




X 


wX 

’<lAf 

,i»f 


1 

iM & g 


.'v/n 


* c. 




ic^r 


<A &v>! 




: t- >V;‘ •'/>’•: 1 


-T^.; 

p ‘ *9f‘.ijc 


•>»•.;. ,J, •;. . -'.;'W, , '»• - v 

I 

^V<'i' 7 ^ *•» -VW,L^- ^ iV. ffliSl 


VrV 








^lEsral 


*F 


flLSf ; ■ ” > *“" 1 J 




iW 




v J«->, 


m V 


i i. 


w 


:tv 

*® SHK Kb/S tfTiP&V Ja? 




,'/-l 


|i -i 




: ---af !'■'• «'»i, , ' ;x-‘ "j - ■ V 

V *V > V*- K ■ < ■ ( ; - y V,, • 


.Art < 




/ if' 


Ajf. t' -’. 


‘ *< , 


v . v -i> v ^ 

.►, .V a* • "w «V • 

fc.V;* '^Vvl'j - ; ^lA "i •\\V'4-y' 4^ 

■b 

>;-, Vl >jv->; ^ > v ;4 &>'i\t;':y 


V *1. 


Jl ' / I " I 
»'•>// 




’f’i A 
If - > 


fzgvW'i 


&>,£ \ *V 
■. V j j 


2f ’• _ fv 


# ' mlS k tviHV' ■$■■ 




fi n' . *•+ < 4 t\ 

> rvx ,rm' i' ■ \y * 

i u * - 


C;* 'M*£WsFgm 




; '.'.' : >4- a' : - •• v--/ •->; x ' .* >- J >. -'■ •• >••;' > . 

V , A?' 1 ’ ^ * ''iW''5 '* \-4 Vv •/■''' w.. jd'v.Cj: "\^'v' 1 •*r > >'?(' ’*' *V~*' v-ivf>^j'gi V^i *1^.*’ ■- ,' \-■■*•'> ’A'-^'i ;rt 

• ■ "<, ■'. \-.$<- a ■ L- -iX ..<!■ ‘-S’i-v:<’/''- 'W ' w.'tj Vj.*.*• '.v. '•l^v^'f'iij,'’ A'>*}•/' a. y.* i '5,4'' > ,' '.^.'V-"/ •' •'’ .vi 'VJ-Wi' $ *>^-'{''^ ‘A 




■ • V I 

\h •'•■. t-.stf - • u-A.’ a, - v ■■ jyV. ••<■'•'*; ,'■’V\j / -.' xiuVrHfc?. '*,■&. ;■• (4 i '!; 1c :'^',iLi i\j 'V;* >$i'V.' :'*'3-*>’‘4 ‘ i \%‘V'''i ' •' •4 v \V. >--v’'. >i yi/ /-'7. 

It v k‘ • IrW : P" x i H;«m ;•! 

^/r. 4,x^.v' vA*5^*^'*wAhw- •«v? i M' / rVw *v k >3^3 

1-^'m :Vv:<%-T^ 


** * 1^' -•••;■-' V?/ •.* I. rr <'yMr.W Y*y '- r -*■',",£ * t p~. ■ "\'•-■a ''"r : y;. -* ''‘ ‘A- A’W--i. *, >.: i>.>^ n ty*-'*' <%■ #f»w«L ^<lv» ■'. *■* •v-?.\UV•»w'}iV‘ t - 

. 

v •'n s x: , '? , -v v ’-' J - ■;•>. ' ^^ vt Si *• >•'••*• ;‘ - V-V -V3v •Vy*’• /-*4• • •• : • '*■ Y. :•& 

•, t -. ■? /.VIA v j, •*>.*; • ■*',./■' T r.iy/^A '« .<■ •< '■• -■’^■ t j'- :*&>•%-/*. «*il**-i*v' : ilx . -l ? V'T”, <-yv.. «uK.aBJ .« .-r.w^ft 4.V, *.%.. ,;>'••* f-^ : ■.'> iktw A ".v,r x -X^ 

-■ r»- &t v, .Y> 4?-V/ : VS»2 > >--'l <tK .-'->; /-.' ’ '•vliV' *.&>'■ • A‘A'-;X ■' ; »? h'-’rvV -1 'i''a I* tJ- • '■ *,• ;?«.>*'■ i*>-• ivi v.>:--'’'. feii.'vy* 

:■> ' 

:V',V: A T&/V v/v Mi •■'jiL^ > M‘\ *.*M a. > 4..7. ^ r^.L:-r. r-' »o >. 1 ,.;*•• ^ ? '*/•■■:#■ ,r?£y," >:, -a-^a .-•jrv *,v.7v - wiltjj® , ..3ry -4, . .v- 


«’• - ' ,J!- Kjlfl J■ V.«1, i 

















































